Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

The UK government, under the apparently outgoing Prime Minister Keir Starmer, is advancing proposals that would require platforms like Facebook, YouTube and others to make BBC and other public service broadcaster content more prominent in users’ feeds.

Officials frame the move as essential to combat ‘disinformation,’ citing Ofcom data that social media serves as the main news source for 51% of adults and 75% of 16- to 24-year-olds.

Yes, they want to turn social media into a literal Ministry of Truth.

Under plans to further restrict private media firms, news from public service broadcasters would be given priority to fight “disinformation”.

The proposals will set Sir Keir Starmer on a collision course with tech giants already frustrated by his under-16s social media ban … pic.twitter.com/uOw4Tb9Ybq

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) June 20, 2026

The plans form part of wider efforts to further restrict private media firms and follow directly on the heels of the controversial under-16s social media ban that has already strained relations with tech companies.

Public reaction has been swift and scathing. Journalist Allison Pearson did not hold back on the BBC’s own record:

During Covid, @BBCNews was the main purveyor of “misinformation”.’
Pure propaganda which led to children being denied school for months and a mass epidemic of mental health problems that has injured a generation many of whom have still not come out of their bedrooms.
So, no. https://t.co/FdWZy5nj6s

— Allison Pearson (@AllisonPearson) June 21, 2026

Author and commentator Bernie drew a pointed historical parallel:

“In 1933, Goebbels argued that Germans needed protection from false information and dangerous ideas. In 2026, Starmer says that British people need protection from ‘disinformation’ and that social media platforms should prioritise BBC and state approved broadcaster content. The comparison is NOT that Britain is Nazi Germany. That is a lazy argument. The comparison is that Starmer’s government is pushing for more control over what citizens read, watch and think and that they claim it’s for our own good. You are not free if the State decided what news you are allowed to view. This is not the work of a government supporting democracy but one that Doesn’t trust its citizens to keep them in power.”

I do not make historical comparisons lightly.

Your government, in line with UN priorities. is moving to crush all information not sanctioned by them.

In 1933, Goebbels argued that Germans needed protection from false information and dangerous ideas.

In 2026, Starmer says… pic.twitter.com/W51yStWzXM

— Bernie (@Artemisfornow) June 20, 2026

Reform UK supporter Chris Rose highlighted the core irony:

Labour plan to force social media platforms to prioritise content from the BBC in our news feeds to fight disinformation.

Ironically, social media has helped to combat a lot of disinformation from the BBC. https://t.co/tXKG70saVJ

— Chris Rose (@ArchRose90) June 20, 2026

This UK initiative does not stand alone. Similar moves are advancing in lockstep across the continent as governments seek greater leverage over information flows.

Germany has pursued measures to force social media platforms to boost state-aligned content and sideline dissenting material under the banner of ‘public value.’

The EU’s Democracy Shield framework has drawn sharp criticism as a vehicle for mass censorship that effectively ends open discourse under the guise of protecting democracy.

In France, President Macron has pushed aggressive censorship proposals widely described as a Ministry of Truth power grab.

The pattern is unmistakable: governments leveraging regulatory power to privilege official or state-funded sources while algorithmically demoting alternatives.

The BBC prioritization scheme fits into a rapid succession of UK measures that collectively tighten state influence over digital space and public narrative.

The under-16s social media ban has been exposed as a monumental pretext for total digital surveillance infrastructure.

Telegram founder Pavel Durov warned that the policy represents the digital iceberg that could sink the free internet.

Separate reporting revealed the UK government maintains a dedicated ‘thought police’ unit aimed at controlling the mass migration narrative.

Further proposals would empower authorities to block ‘false information’ during crisis events, creating an official Ministry of Truth mechanism.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan has separately called for a government social media disinformation unit, adding another layer of official narrative enforcement.

Advocates insist elevating BBC content will help users encounter more ‘reliable’ information. The claim collapses under even cursory examination of the broadcaster’s recent track record.

The BBC has repeatedly been accused of sinking to new lows on accuracy and impartiality.

Its former news director stated that trans bias and progressive orthodoxy drove her departure.

Additional controversies include a high-profile fake news editing scandal that prompted a $10 billion lawsuit from President Trump.

Further examples involve portrayals of Islamic child slavery in Afghanistan as somehow necessary, biased handling of Islamist issues in Britain, and presenter conduct that drew sharp rebukes from figures like John Cleese.

Public sentiment on X reflects deep skepticism that the state broadcaster represents a credible bulwark against disinformation.

Wanting media that can be censored by the state to be broadcast on the internet that will be ID locked by the state.

So this is how democracy dies. With a bunch of terrible parents going “it’s about time”. https://t.co/rvsGBa27zh

— Christina Tasty (@ChristinaTasty) June 21, 2026

I hope people can wake up and see what this is really about: controlling access to information. The internet democratized access to news and information, and people in power do not want that! https://t.co/xXTeQ96NTT

— Taylor Lorenz (@TaylorLorenz) June 19, 2026

Citizens will be told the same thing, will believe the same thing …

Starmer will demand BBC truth is given priority. So we are fed a consistent narrative.

Anything else is disinformation. Which isn’t authoritarian at all pic.twitter.com/7P9ujzGI8w

— Bernie (@Artemisfornow) June 20, 2026

Another Starmer poisoned legacy in his censorious war with Big Tech: undermine any claims for BBC impartiality. Surely if state declares BBC & public service broadcasters are one & only truth (in face of a slew of contrary evidence), won’t this undermine trust even further? https://t.co/zSKupBpgwK

— Claire Fox (@Fox_Claire) June 20, 2026

For now, there is a simple solution.

Keir Starmer’s government is preparing plans to force social media and video platforms to give preferential treatment to content from the BBC, ITV and Channel 4.

Let’s all block them.

Problem solved.

— Benjamin (@UKFREEDOMUNITE) June 21, 2026

The government wants to fill our timelines with state funded propaganda.

Block the BBC, ITV and Channel 4.

They can’t fill your feed if you’ve blocked them.

Simple problems require simple solutions. https://t.co/na6g61rm2e pic.twitter.com/U98ACQvhtY

— Ben Graham (@BenGrahamUK) June 20, 2026

Of course, the government could, via it’s regulator Ofcom, simply mandate that these sources cannot be blocked and must be injected into people’s feeds. They could also employ a more subtle manipulation of the algorithm to ensure it happens, regardless of any blocking.

Mandating algorithmic favoritism for any single outlet, especially one with the BBC’s baggage, will not restore trust. Alternative platforms continue to grow, and Community Notes-style transparency tools already expose manipulation faster than official gatekeepers can suppress it.

Governments that distrust citizens to navigate information without state curation reveal more about their own insecurities than about any genuine disinformation crisis.

The free exchange of ideas, even uncomfortable ones, remains the only proven defense against real propaganda.

These latest European and British maneuvers represent the opposite impulse: centralized narrative control dressed up as public protection.

Citizens on both sides of the Atlantic have seen this playbook before and are increasingly unwilling to play along.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Authored by Maria Mocerino via Interesting Engineering,

The largest Roman bathhouse complex ever discovered in the Netherlands has surfaced, shedding new light on the wealth and importance of the ancient Roman city of Ulpia Noviomagus.

Researchers from the archaeological firms RAAP and BAAC were conducting routine investigations in Nijmegen’s Waalfront district, a site slated for new residential development. The excavation, which began in September of last year and will conclude in July, uncovered a public bathhouse, residential blocks, luxury townhouses, streets, and a tower dating back nearly 2,000 years.

“For years, the traces of the Roman past at this location were invisible, hidden deep underground. Now that we are realizing a new living environment here, the past has become visible,” said Joost Mulder, BPD’s Regional Director for the North-East & Central region, in a press release.

The bathhouse complex, or thermae, covered at least 4,900 square meters, making it the second-largest excavated Roman public bath complex in the Netherlands. Despite centuries of stone removal and reuse following the Roman period, parts of the structure remain exceptionally well-preserved.

Roman history unearthed

The size of the complex reflects the importance of Ulpia Noviomagus – the Roman city that once stood here – which is believed to have received its official status from Emperor Trajan around 100 AD. The discoveries suggest that this area of the city remained active well into the third century AD.

The bathhouse was richly decorated. Its interior walls were clad in marble. The floors were laid with black-and-white limestone tiles. Other rooms featured colorful, painted plaster. Decorative limestone and sandstone moldings adorned the building’s facades, while columns made from the same materials enhanced its splendor.

Archaeologists also uncovered extensive drainage systems, flooring, and a hypocaust – a sophisticated Roman underfloor heating system supported by brick pillars. This technology circulated hot air beneath a raised floor, as per Archaeology News. Two stone foundations survive to a height of nearly two meters, making them some of the best-preserved examples of Roman masonry in Nijmegen.

Tens of thousands of artifacts recovered from the site point to the affluent lifestyle that residents enjoyed during the second and third centuries AD.

Among the discoveries are bronze statue fragments, signet rings, a necklace with a gold clasp, coins, and hundreds of bone hairpins used in elaborate Roman hairstyles. Notably, two of the hairpins featured remarkable carvings of cats – one seated and one standing.

However, a bronze bust depicting Bacchus, the Roman god of wine, stood out the most to archaeologists. They believe the object originally formed part of a pitcher or a piece of furniture before later being adapted for use on a weighing scale.

Archaeologists also recovered numerous coins from the reign of Emperor Postumus, who ruled between 260 and 269 AD, providing rare evidence of continued occupation during a relatively poorly documented period.

Integrating the past into the future

Developers and city officials plan to integrate the site’s Roman heritage into the future neighborhood, added Archaeology News.

“The link to the past will remain visible in the future as well. For instance, a number of residential buildings will feature a covered walking area with rows of columns. A colonnade just like in Roman times. And developers plan to call the green square in the heart of the area, inspired by the floor plan of the bathhouse complex, Thermenplein. A direct reference to the Roman meeting place that was here some 2,000 years ago,” concludes the press release.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

Leftists in the EU who spent years blocking real border enforcement are now whining about a victory party after conservatives pushed through a motion to create powerful tools to remove illegal migrants.

The chamber could not stop laughing. A ‘Renew Europe’ MEP aligned with French President Emmanuel Macron stood up and demanded punishment for conservative MEPs who gathered on the European Parliament roof, drank heavily, and celebrated the passage of the bloc’s toughest-ever deportation reforms.

The presiding officer brushed it off and The room roared with amusement.

Laughter erupts in the European Parliament after Macron’s MEP Fabienne Keller tries to get conservative MEPs punished for serious breeches of the rules

She says they met on the Parliament’s roof & “drank a lot, a lot” to celebrate passing new laws for deporting illegal migrants pic.twitter.com/2gzLCdcKZT

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) June 20, 2026

This outburst came days after the European Parliament voted 418 to 218, with 30 abstentions, to approve the new Return Regulation.

Conservative and sovereignist MEPs from the EPP, ECR, Patriots for Europe, and Europe of Sovereign Nations groups supplied the decisive majority.

The measure updates the hopelessly outdated 2008 rules and gives member states real power to enforce removals.

In our earlier video we highlighted the immediate leftist reaction inside the chamber: chants of ‘Shame on you’ from leftists with chants of ‘Send them back’ in response from conservatives.

Now they are complaining about a rooftop toast. The contrast could not be clearer. One side delivers results for citizens who have endured years of unchecked arrivals, crime, and welfare strain. The other side throws procedural tantrums and pretends a private celebration violates parliamentary decorum.

They still think they’re in Harry Potter fighting Voldemort.

“The era of resistance begins”
How about you slobs start the era of not letting your shirts hang out of your trousers first. Pathetic. https://t.co/IchmcEbTw9

— European Propagandist (@EuropaAdAstra) June 19, 2026

The regulation makes deportation orders issued in one member state valid across the entire EU.

It extends maximum detention periods for those who refuse to leave, removes automatic suspensive effect on appeals in many cases, doubles entry bans to ten years (lifetime for security threats), and allows member states to conclude agreements with third countries for ‘return hubs’ where rejected migrants can be processed and removed without remaining inside EU territory.

Non-cooperating origin countries face visa restrictions, aid cuts, and trade measures – the same leverage the Trump administration successfully deployed.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni welcomed the outcome as validation of the model she pioneered with Albania.

‘We promised Italians we would change Europe, and we did it, with courage, patience, and determination,’ she said.

Meloni added, ‘This innovative solution has been resisted at every turn by the Italian and European left, but thanks to this government, it has now become a tool available to the whole of Europe.’

MEP Marieke Ehlers of the Patriots for Europe group stated ‘This regulation puts the obligation exactly where it belongs: on the illegal migrant… The days of pampering are over. You have no right to stay, which means you have one simple obligation: pack your bags and leave our territory.’

She added that the text hands real power back to national capitals: ‘We are taking back control… Almost all provisions give Member States the freedom to go further.’

French EPP negotiator François-Xavier Bellamy called it the end of decades of failure. ‘After decades of failure and years of deadlock, Europe is ending its powerlessness in the face of illegal immigration. No one can claim any longer that Europe has no tools to act. The rules are now in place. The responsibility lies with governments to use them.’

In a landmark 418-218 vote, the European Parliament just passed the strictest migration and deportation law in EU history.
When the results were announced, MEPs began chanting “Send them back!” inside the chamber.
The new rules include:
• Deportation orders valid across all… pic.twitter.com/r4zwulNkz7

— Make Europe Great Again – M.E.G.A (@ScaryEurope) June 20, 2026

French President Emmanuel Macron quickly distanced himself at the EU summit in Brussels. He declared that France would neither participate in nor fund third-country return hubs, calling the approach ineffective and contrary to French principles.

French President Emmanuel Macron firmly rejected the creation of migrant “return hubs” in third countries, stating that France will not participate in or support the funding of such outsourcing initiatives.
Speaking in Brussels at the conclusion of a two-day EU summit, Macron… pic.twitter.com/6yU5zjFAms

— Don. Tesman Irabor (@TvslEspana) June 20, 2026

The same Macron who lectures others on European values now refuses to use the very instruments his own parliament helped create. The gap between rhetoric and reality on migration has never been wider.

Globalist pushback has already been initiated as the United Nations voiced concerns that the new return hubs could violate human rights standards.

Critics on the left and in international organisations frame any effective removal policy as inherently cruel, even as European cities continue to absorb the costs of failed integration and repeated criminal acts by rejected or illegal migrants.

The UN warns that new EU migrant rules could violate human rights. Plans to outsource deportation of rejected asylum seekers raise serious concerns. https://t.co/TmYNvesrOx

— The Brussels Times (@BrusselsTimes) June 20, 2026

For years globalist voices insisted that mass low-skilled migration was inevitable, economically necessary, and morally superior.

They dismantled internal borders, expanded asylum loopholes, and attacked any leader who tried to enforce existing law. Return rates stayed dismal. Criminal networks thrived. Public trust collapsed.

Conservative MEPs simply used their growing numbers to force an update that reflects what citizens have demanded for a decade.

The left’s response – procedural complaints, accusations of misconduct over a private celebration, and renewed warnings from the UN – reveals the same refusal to accept democratic outcomes that has defined the migration debate from the start.

The laughter in the chamber was not just amusement at a thin-skinned complaint. It was recognition that the excuses have run out.

Europe now possesses the legal tools to remove those with no right to remain. Whether national governments use them remains to be seen, but the parliamentary majority has shifted decisively toward enforcement.

The same forces that once sneered at ‘Send them back’ as fringe bigotry are watching their own colleagues chant it on the floor. The Overton window did not shift incidentally. It moved because voters across the continent grew tired of policies that prioritised arrivals over safety and sovereignty.

‘What happened to multiculturalism preached by European globalists? ‘Send Them Back’: EU Parliament Passes Major Deportation Reforms, Including Third Country Return Hubs https://t.co/lXulis0ZfS

— Silvio Picardi (@sil37839) June 20, 2026

Europe’s conservative MEPs just proved that when they coordinate, they can deliver. The left can keep filing ethics complaints about rooftop drinks. The rest of the continent is focused on results.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Authored by Pierluigi Paganini via Security Affairs,

Dialog, a private invitation-only organization cofounded in 2006 by billionaire tech investor Peter Thiel, has spent two decades refusing to disclose its membership.

That position became harder to maintain last week when Swiss hacktivist maia arson crimew, known for exposing the US government’s No Fly List, found an open directory embedded in the source code of dialog.org that was visible to anyone who viewed the page. WIRED independently verified the contents and obtained the registration list for Dialog’s 2026 retreat, scheduled for August 12-16 near Dublin, Ireland.

“A trove of internal records from a secret society for powerful figures in US politics, finance, and tech was left exposed online, WIRED has confirmed, naming participants in its events and revealing sensitive personal details they were assured would stay private,” reported Wired. “The group, called Dialog, is a private, invitation-only organization cofounded in 2006 by the billionaire tech investor Peter Thiel. It convenes US officials, foreign government figures, and Silicon Valley executives at off-the-record annual retreats.”

The 2026 list names 222 registrants, 87 of them first-time attendees. Others have histories stretching back more than a decade, a handful to the founding itself. None used a government email address, placing their attendance outside public records laws.

The roster is not a list of adjacent power. It’s power in direct regulatory relationship with itself. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent appears alongside Auren Hoffman, Dialog’s chairman, who founded location-data broker SafeGraph and identity-resolution firm LiveRamp. Senator Ted Cruz, who chairs the committee overseeing the FTC and its data-privacy authority, is listed in the same directory. Palantir cofounder Joe Lonsdale, whose software runs case management for ICE and data fusion for the Pentagon, appears alongside Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and Representative Jim Himes, ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, which oversees agencies Palantir contracts with.

Forbes confirmed additional members including investor Marc Andreessen and investor and former Facebook board member Jim Breyer.

General Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s supreme allied commander Europe and head of US European Command, is recorded as having attended Dialog gatherings since 2021.

The session agenda for the 2026 retreat includes “Navigating WWIII,” “Battlefield Technologies,” “Bring Back Nuclear,” and “Build-a-Cult,” the last moderated by the founder of the Christian networking site Pray.com. There’s also “How’s Your Sex Life?” which presumably has a different moderator.

“The website directory names sitting Trump administration officials, two US senators, six members of the Paypal Mafia, a former Middle East chief of intelligence, and a sitting ambassador to the United States, along with the founders and directors of many of the country’s largest surveillance, data-broker, and advertising-data companies.” Wired continues.

The leaked registration list adds names not in the public directory of 113: Randy Kroszner, former Federal Reserve governor now on the Bank of England’s Financial Policy Committee; Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League; Ryan Stowers, executive director of the Charles Koch Foundation; Roger Myerson, Nobel laureate economist; and a cluster of Google and Google DeepMind executives including Tom Lue, who leads global affairs for the frontier AI division.

The data breach is structurally embarrassing because it was entirely avoidable. The directory was served to any visitor who viewed the page’s source code. A separate Dialog page at app.dialog.org presents a sign-in screen with no terms of service, no indication the application is restricted, and no invitation requirement. The records sat in Airtable, a commercial database, and included for each participant their membership status, every retreat attended, biography, home city, and a private access token functioning as a login credential.

Dialog also runs a matchmaking service. Its registration form asks whether participants are “looking for love” and offers to include single respondents in “future matchmaking.” A separate site at dating.dialog.org hosts an app pitched as “meaningful connections for exceptional people.” The form also collects each registrant’s political leaning, which Dialog promised would never be shared.

“That data, and the matchmaking responses, were exposed in the leak.” concludes Wired.

The data collected by Dialog could be valuable for criminals or intelligence agencies because it reveals personal vulnerabilities, relationship status, political views, and access to influential networks. Such information can support targeted phishing, social engineering, honey-trap operations, blackmail, or influence campaigns. The risk is amplified because participants are often members of the global elite, making them attractive intelligence targets. Many may be highly accomplished in their fields but still willing to share sensitive personal details in trusted environments, creating opportunities for manipulation and exploitation.

An internal guide for event moderators, also found in the exposed directory, instructs them to remind participants that everything is off the record, keep comments concise and “nonobvious,” and model brief introductions to “avoid status signaling” in a room full of senators, dignitaries, and tycoons. The discipline imposed on members apparently didn’t extend to basic website security.